Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
or medicaid reform even tax reform. those things are not going to happen for the reasons we just described. getting a number to fund through 2014 and avoiding kind of the harsh realities of sequestration would be good goals according to republicans and even some democrats. >> you know, ryan, i kind of think getting rid of sequestration, even if it means no revenue, might be a good deal. the assumption has always been republicans would be hurt so badly by defense cuts we can extract something. rand paul doesn't care about the defense cuts. why don't we jettison some of the crap, speaking about defense cuts. he wants more defense cuts. the idea this is somehow leveraged is maybe not that accurate. if you can unwind sequestration or put in a better bargain, if you will, and not get revenue, it still might be a good deal for democrats at this point. >> not a good bargain for the tea party. if you want to look for a sign of how much less power the tea party has now, look at what tom cole said, both sides won. he said more revenue, higher taxes, if they can do away with sequester, which is more
the expiration of a payroll tax cut which knocked 2% off consumers monthly paychecks. is that an argument you make? the fact this goes back into the economy as does to heather's point the minimum wage? >> of course. that's also an argument. it's a secondary argument. the main argument we're just being mean-spirited and hurting a lot of people who are in desperate need of help. but the same thing, one of the reasons why we had to fight for stimulus and couldn't put forward programs we wanted to put forward to stimulate the economy, unemployment didn't go down as much as we hoped. of course programs have an effect on the economy. main thing for me, how can we talk in the 21st century being the richest country in the world, people are hurting. the minimum wage was mentioned, just mentioned. we're not raising minimum wage. we're making it harder for people to get a decent wage. you know, the republican party's mantra seems to be. i've got mine, now you go fend for yourself. >> julia, you're in a red state. w.h.o. williams at fox, not a channel known for its liberal views says it's bad politics fo
korea, gun rights, same-sex marriage, tax cuts, guantanamo, interrogation practices, surveillance practices iran, climate change lebanon war harriet meyers, middle east peace, syria, russia, federal spending. almost every matter of import they never saw eye to eye on. >> yeah. it was a dramatically evolved relationship. cheney was important in the beginning. never quite as single mindedly the puppet master some people might have thought. but by the end they had drifted apart. president bush wanted to try more diplomacy in his second term. he did want to rebuild res with the allies as we talked about in the last segment he tried to moderate to the some extent some counter-terrorism policies that caused controversy. vice president cheney worried that was getting away from what was most important, worried it was away from the principles they developed in the beginning after 9/11 and resisted a lot of these changes. although as he said publicly in these last few days, he didn't always win. >> one of the things you make note of is the way in which cheney dealt with bush, which was not
support and input from its employers, as we did, without raising taxes and by carefully phasing it in to avoid the type of disruptions we are seeing nationally. joining me today, democratic strategist and principal at the raven group, jamal simmons. random house executive, john meachem. and senior staff writer at salon, brian boitler. also joining us, white house correspondent peter alexander. peter, let's talk about what has just happened. 3 1/2 hours of what i will say is exhaustive testimony from kathleen sebelius, defending the president, defending the affordable care act. the president is going to sort of follow that up later today, this afternoon. how concerned is the white house at this point? republicans seem to have moved sort of -- they have a hybrid strategy of attacking both the website and the quote/unquote president's failed promises that everybody could keep their health care. from 1600 pennsylvania avenue, what's the view? >> i think there's definitely frustration. there's obviously concern, as you have conversations with white house officials privately. they hop
doesn't. read my lips, no new taxes. this one of those moments for him. >> i want to ask you, given the way this was developed, kathleen sebelius couldn't house the people working on the website in her office because of various fears regarding partisan political environment, funding, a host of issues. are you more confident the system they have in place now, the folks they are bringing in, the outside consultants are going to have an easier, less thorny time unraveling problems with this website they would have had six months ago? it seems the climate around the aca was no less heated than it was preelection. >> there's no question they obviously have a better management in place, property back jeffrey zients, former director, quite capable, president is involved, getting nightly briefings on it. there's no question they have a more concerted focus and better management structure for getting this done. whether they will actually fix the website by the end of november remains to be seen because it is such a formidable task. that still remain to be seen. >> it is an exhaustive and tho
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)